Bouchard v. Synchrony Bank (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-138-16, 6 pp.) (Patrick Michael Duffy, J.) 2:16-cv-01713; D.S.C.
Holding: Where plaintiff alleges, “Defendants’ false reports and furnishings of information to the effect that Plaintiff owed money was done with malicious intent, that intent specifically being to coerce Plaintiff to pay money he did not owe,” plaintiff’s defamation claim is not preempted by the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.
In construing the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s two preemption provisions, which were enacted at different times, the court follows the “statutory approach” used by district courts in the Fourth Circuit. Applying the statutory approach, plaintiff’s above-quoted allegation removes plaintiff’s claim from the ambit of 15 U.S.C. § 1681h(e).